1. The scope and ambit of Sections 32 and 33 of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the extent of the power of the appropriate Government arise for consideration in this Writ Petition.

2. The petitioner is a Graduate. She has completed P.G.Diploma in Computer Application. She is blind. According to her, the percentage of her blindness is 100%. The Medical Board has certified that the petitioner is blind. Mahathma Gandhi University invited applications from suitable candidates for being appointed to the post of Assistant Grade-II. The petitioner applied for the same. After holding a screening test in 2006, the University invited the petitioner to appear for the written test held in 2009. She appeared for the written test. The petitioner was successful in the written test. The petitioner had appeared for the written examination with the help of a scribe, as sanctioned by the University.

3. The University issued Ext.P2 notification dated 2.11.2009 directing all the physically handicapped candidates, who had appeared for the written examination, to appear for an interview to assess their suitability to the post. The names of 13 persons were included in Ext.P2 list of which petitioner was No.13. The petitioner appeared for the interview. The University prepared the rank list. It is stated that from out of 13 persons in Ext.P2 list, 8 persons were included in the rank list. All those 8 persons are in the category of Orthopedically Handicapped. It is not in dispute that more than 200 candidates were selected to the post of Assistant Grade II. The contention of the petitioner is that going by the number of persons selected, at least two of them should be from the category of blind persons. In view of Section 33 of the Act, it is contended that since the University did not adhere to Section 33 of the Act, there was violation of Article 16(1) of the Constitution.

4. The petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the rank list and to direct the University to issue a revised list to include the petitioner in the rank list. There is also a prayer for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the University to appoint blind candidates to the post of Assistant Grade II from out of the candidates in Ext.P2.

5. The petitioner stated in the Writ Petition that she was appointed as Assistant Grade II in the University on a temporary basis on daily wages in the year 2004 and for short durations thereafter, as evidenced by Exts.P4, P4(a) and P4(b). It is also stated by the petitioner that the posts of Telephone Operator, Ronco Operator, Booth Attender, Photocopier Operator and Front Office Assistants in PRO Section were also included in the category of Assistant Grade II in M.G. University.

6. In the counter affidavit, the Registrar of the University stated that 13 physically handicapped candidates were called for the interview to assess suitability of the candidates. It is also stated in the counter affidavit as follows:

"9. The committee took the decision to exclude two candidates including the petitioner as they were found not suitable to the post of Assistant Grade II as per G.O.(P) No.20/98/P&ARD dated 14.7.1998. As stated above, in Annexure II of the G.O. the posts suitable for appointment of different categories of physically handicapped in subordinate service (entry cadre) are identified. The post of clerks are not identified as suitable for appointment of blind and partially blind candidates in the entry cadre of subordinate services of the state. In class III subordinate service of the University the entry cadre is the post of Assistant Grade II. The duties and responsibilities of the Assistants in the University is clerical in nature such as nothing, drafting, tabulation of marks in examination branch in the University and maintenance of various records in the administration, academic, exam and